When should we require that firmware be free? (mjg59.dreamwidth.org)
from petsoi@discuss.tchncs.de to linux@lemmy.ml on 12 Dec 16:40
https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/26651655

#linux

threaded - newest

Orbituary@lemmy.world on 12 Dec 17:16 next collapse

We? What can “we” do about it?

ma1w4re@lemm.ee on 12 Dec 17:56 collapse

Apes together strong. “We” can accomplish anything in large enough numbers.

some_random_nick@lemmy.world on 12 Dec 22:21 collapse

We might as well bring some pitchforks and torches.

DrDystopia@lemy.lol on 13 Dec 21:08 collapse

We get further with pitchforks, torches and a smile than with just a smile.

buckykat@hexbear.net on 12 Dec 17:34 next collapse

Won’t happen under capitalism. Which is just another reason capitalism needs to go.

sndmn@lemmy.ca on 12 Dec 18:58 next collapse

Always

tabular@lemmy.world on 12 Dec 21:04 next collapse

One is to view free firmware as desirable but not necessary

I can’t make firmware but I hope the people who can make free (libre) firmware don’t give up, which is what that position sounds like.

arthur@lemmy.zip on 12 Dec 22:00 next collapse

A way to address that is to require that if the company does not provide software updates, it must release the source code and tooling to it’s customers under cc-0 license. For games that depends on server-side services to work, that should be provided as well.

But under capitalism, that will be an uphill battle.

schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de on 12 Dec 22:29 next collapse

I remember that RMS’s position is that if someone (!) can change it (eg there is an “update firmware” button), it is a computer and should run free software. If no one can ever change it, it is a circuit. I think that makes some sense.

oo1@lemmings.world on 13 Dec 09:08 next collapse

Many microcontrollers can be set up for in circuit programming.

They might be intended for one time programming in the factory, but solder some wires on in the right place and supply the right signal and it can be reprogrammed.

Is that a circuit or a computer?

TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world on 14 Dec 17:03 collapse

It doesn’t make any sense. If I make a box with a screen that runs linux (idk for ordering lunch in school canteen) and only update the OS by physically removing the hard drive and installing it from different computer, does that justify it being proprietary?

On the other end a circuit can be changed e.g. by tuning a potentiometer or straight up changing a component. That’s not any different than changing a value of a variable in the firmware. There is no actual difference in hardware and software, just different level of abstraction like C vs Python.

MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml on 13 Dec 13:11 next collapse

If it’s critical for operation of a device the company makes it’s money with.

Edit: free, but i meant open

TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world on 14 Dec 16:40 collapse

Yep FSF’s bizarre anti software freedom stance does not make sense. Luckily the more sensible Right to Repair “schematics or die” is much more popular. So in the end it does not really matter what the FSF thinks and the damage done is minimal.